What party most closely represents your point of view?
Democratic
Republican
Non-Affiliated
Other
Northwest Observer
Subscribe for Free Email Updates
Name:
Email:
Search Articles
       


Post an Event


Oregon Republican Party State Central Committee Meeting
Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 7:30 am
Including election of a new Vice-Chair
Marion Post 661 VFW
630 Hood Street, NE
Salem, Oregon



OREGON FREEDOM RALLY
Saturday, June 4, 2022 at 12:00 pm
Oregon's premiere annual event for grassroots conservatives sponsored by Oregon Liberty Alliance and others. Featuring Dinesh D'Souze, Elisha Krauss, Scott Rasmussen and Isabel Brown. Lunch included at $65 per person, under 16 are free. Doors open at 11am to network with exhibitors. Register at: www.OregonFreedomRally.com
Wingspan Event & Conference Center, 801 NE 34th Ave, Hillsboro, OR 97124



DALLAS Community-wide ONE Service
Sunday, June 5, 2022 at 10:30 am
ONE Community joined together for a community wide Worship Service. Fellowship and coffee at 10:30, Service at 11am.
Dallas High School Football Stadium



Fight for Freedom Event
Friday, June 10, 2022 at 6:00 pm
Training on survival and emergency medicine by XSA International Krisanne Hall 2-Day Constitutional Training Friday 6-10pm, Saturday 8am-11pm, Sunday 8am-2pm Tickets: $30 www.peoplesrightsoregon5.com/fight-for-freedom-event
Deschutes County Fairgrounds



Fight for Freedom Event
Friday, June 10, 2022 at 6:00 pm
Training on survival and emergency medicine by XSA International Krisanne Hall 2-Day Constitutional Training Friday 6-10pm, Saturday 8am-11pm, Sunday 8am-2pm Tickets: $30 https://www.peoplesrightsoregon5.com/fight-for-freedom-event
Deschutes County Fairgrounds



Fight for Freedom Event
Friday, June 10, 2022 at 6:00 pm
Training on survival and emergency medicine by XSA International
Krisanne Hall 2-Day Constitutional Training

Friday 6-10pm, Saturday 8am-11pm, Sunday 8am-2pm

Tickets: $30

https://www.peoplesrightsoregon5.com/fight-for-freedom-event
Deschutes County Fairgrounds



World Athletics Championships
Friday, July 15, 2022 at 8:00 am
The World Athletics Championships are coming to Eugene this summer (July 15-24 2022), the first time in history that the championships will be held in the United States. This mega-sporting event will showcase the best track and field athletes in the world. The event will bring 2,000 athletes from more than 200 nations, all competing for 49 gold medals. About 20,000 to 25,000 attendees are expected per session, with most days hosting two sessions (both morning and afternoon).
Eugene



Gathering of Eagles/Rally Around the Flag
Saturday, September 10, 2022 at 10:00 am
Watch for details, sign up for Oregon Liberty Coalition (OLC) alerts and information. orlibertycoalition@gmail.com
Ames Ranch, Turner, Oregon



Oregon General Election
Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 8:00 pm
Statewide


View All Calendar Events


“Swimming in Cash”
Republicans Set Priorities For Excess Tax Revenue

According to the Oregon Office of Economic Analysis, Oregon is swimming in money. After devastating lockdowns that have resulted in the highest long-term unemployment rate in nine years, the state still brought in billions over projection, indicating that calls for federal bailouts for state governments were overblown

This will trigger one of the largest kicker refunds in state history at $1.4 billion. That’s enough to give every individual in Oregon $330, despite Democrat book cooking to keep some of the kicker.

“Money is coming out of our ears. This one-time dump of federal money needs to be used responsibly. We must first ensure taxpayers get their full Kicker. That money belongs to them, and there is no justification to take it from them,” Senate Republican Leader Fred Girod (R-Lyons) said.

After the kicker, the Legislature has a little over a month to appropriate an extra $1.182 billion this budget cycle. Today’s announcement also projects the state to bring in an extra $1.250 billion in the 2021-2023 biennium.

“This money should be directed to Oregonians' most pressing needs. We must fully fund and fully reopen our schools, invest in our workforce, and assist in wildfire recovery efforts,” Senator Girod said.

Senate Republicans are proposing the following allocations from excess revenue that has come into the state:

--Staff Reports

Post Date: 2021-05-19 18:28:44Last Update: 2021-05-19 18:38:04



Why Bills Die
In this case, it’s unwanted and unneeded

On of the police reform bills introduced this session is a ban on police use of HB 2928 which regulates use of chemical incapacitants, kinetic impact projectiles, sound devices and strobe lights by law enforcement agencies.

Introduuced by Representative Bynum, the bill has been assigned to the Joint Committee on Ways and Means, where no one seems to be paying attention to it. It's co-sponsored by a host of Democrats, including Representative Wlnsvey Campos(D-Aloha), Maxine Dexter(D-Portland), Khanh Pham (D-Portland), Karin Power (D-Portland), Lisa Reynolds (D-Portland, and Andrea Valderrama (D-Portland).

In a recent poll, some similar concepts did not do well. Whan asked if they would like to "prohibit police from using pepper spray except when riots are officially declared," Oregonians were tame to the idea.

Strongly Support23%
Somewhat Support21%
Somewhat Oppose17%
Strongly Oppose30%
Don't know8%


In the case of this bill, it passed out of the House Committee on Judiciary, Chaired by Representative Bynum, no less and has now spent more than a month in Ways & Means, where it seems destined to die.


--Staff Reports

Post Date: 2021-05-19 17:03:40Last Update: 2021-05-19 18:40:01



Government Meddling in Business
Mandated requirements for board directors

HB 3110 has passed in the Oregon House of Representatives on party lines and moves to the Senate for consideration. This bill requires board of directors of publicly traded corporation to have at least one female director and one director who is a member of an underrepresented community.

Board composition is ultimately up to a corporation's shareholders votes. Representative John Lively points out, “there is a great deal of evidence showing that these decisions are not always made fairly or with the financial health of the corporation in mind. There is quite a bit of data showing a certain percentage of a Board of Directors being composed of women results in greater profitability, for example, yet a surprisingly high number of Boards still do not include any women.” So, according to Representative Lively, it’s big government’s responsibility to force a more profitable scenario for a corporation.

Lively also says, “HB 3110 preserves the shareholders' choice in Board selection but levees a fine if they decide not to be inclusive in a few specific ways.” If no females run for a board, or shareholders don’t vote for at least one female, it’s a civil penalty of at least $10,000 for publicly traded corporations. Isn’t this voter manipulation, also called voter fraud?

Not to make this bill more confusing, but the bill defines “Female” as meaning an individual who self-identifies as a woman, regardless of the sex assigned to the individual at birth. It seems a man can self-identify as a female or qualify as underrepresented.

Representative David Brock Smith (R-Port Orford) submitted a Vote Explanation:

“Forcing a corporation to have specified proportions of female directors and members of BIPOC communities is not something this legislative body should be doing and as many women and BIPOC leaders have said, this action would diminish the hard work of those that currently hold these positions. A perfect example of this are within this very House of Representatives, where the majority of members are women.”

The bill degrades females and underrepresented. Women work hard to earn their place and this is offensive and belittling to a woman that would be appointed to a board for any other reason than her ability. The same applies to underrepresented, which is an individual who identifies as having a low income or very low income background, including almost anyone except a straight white person from a moderate to wealthy background, and they should feel the same about their ability to qualify.

It goes against business concept that shareholders electing board members. Shareholders have many interests, but first and foremost it is the financial health of the business. Companies and board members have a fiduciary duty to shareholders to maximize their return on investment. That means that directors are voted on based on whether they will further the goal of benefiting shareholders, not the community at-large. Trying to tie a false sense of equity is government capturing the free market into captivity.


--Donna Bleiler

Post Date: 2021-05-19 09:00:39Last Update: 2021-05-19 09:50:29



Free Health Care
Counties could be required to finance what was enacted by the legislature

Many bills this session have moved through both chambers on party line votes. However, with the Democrat Party in charge there has been little the Republicans have been able to do to stop legislation from moving into law.

SJR 12 introduced by Senator Elizabeth Steiner-Hayward (D–Portland) and Representative Rob Nosse (D-Portland) has been 16 years in the making and pays homage the late Rep. Mitch Greenlick. In 2005, Greenlick filed a petition for the “Hope for Oregon Families” ballot initiative. The HOPE for Oregon Families initiative if passed by the voters would have added Section 46 to Article 1 of the Oregon Constitution stating that: Health care is an essential safeguard of human life and dignity and there is an obligation for the state to ensure that every Oregon resident has access to effective and affordable health care as a fundamental right.

Although it failed to make the ballot it did spark a movement to provide healthcare for all in Oregonians which has partially been adopted through the passage of Cover Oregon, the Federal Affordable Care Act, and the Oregon Healthy Kids program. Since then, several attempts have been made to pass similar legislation onto the voters for approval. Each of those measurers failed in the legislature despite the Democratic party having control of the House, the Senate and the Governor’s office. During the House floor debate Rep. Brock-Smith (R-Port Orford) reminded his colleagues that “This is not the first time this bill has appeared in this chamber and I think it needs to be said that, with all due respect to the late Representative Greenlick and his body of work for all Oregonians, we have not passed this bill because it is not a good bill and his passing does not make the bill any better”.

However, this time the majority party pushed it over the finish line and SJR 12 is headed to the voters in November. They will now decide if Section 1 of the Oregon Constitution should be changed to ensure that every resident of the state has access to cost-effective, clinically appropriate, and affordable health care.

If approved by the voters, the aspirations of the resolution will then need to be codified into law by the Legislature. In her remarks during the Senate Floor vote, Senator Steiner Hayward stated “It will require substantial action on the part of this legislature, in consultation with a wide range of experts, to determine the best way to fulfill the requirements put forward in this constitutional amendment. Those legislative actions will then be evaluated as part of the process for their costs and how they will be paid for. In other words, it is aspirational until it is passed by the voters, then it becomes the obligation of the legislature.

Representative Christine Drazen (R-Canby) agreed that sending it to the voters under Section 1 of the Constitution it becomes an obligation of the state if passed. “SJR 12 is either aspirational or it is a right, it can’t be both” she stated to her colleagues during floor debate. “Upon passage it becomes an obligation of the state of Oregon to provide every resident of the state with access to cost-effective, clinically appropriate, and affordable health care” she concluded.

A D V E R T I S E M E N T

A D V E R T I S E M E N T

If approved by the voters, the Legislature will need to balance it with that of other existing obligations such as funding public schools and other essential public services. However, as noted by the Legislative Council, the state could also be responsible for right of action claims (lawsuits) against the state if they fail to meet that obligation. In their report they stated,

“If SJR 12 is adopted by the voters, the state could be subject to a lawsuit if it fails to satisfactorily implement each resident of Oregon’s fundamental right to access cost-effective, clinically appropriate and affordable health care. The text of SJR 12establishes a state obligation and a corresponding individual right. Further, Sen. Steiner Hayward (D-Portland) acknowledged that an action could be brought against the state”. The concluded that, “We believe a court would likely conclude that subsections (1) and (2) of section 47 (of the SJR 12) read together, along with the legislative history, create a private right that could be enforced in court and that the adoption of SJR 12 by the people constitutes a waiver of sovereign immunity.

In addition, if the voters approve the ballot measure generated by SJR 12, the Legislature could place the aspirational responsibility onto the counties, cities and other entities. Representative Cedric Hayden (R–Roseburg), who initiated the conversation with Legislative Council, told the members of the House that “It has been stated that this may not cost the state anything. I believe there is a loophole”. Again, he referred to the response from Legislative Council which stated,

“The Legislative Assembly would not be prohibited by the Oregon Constitution from enacting legislation to require county governments to establish and maintain health care delivery systems so that county residents can have access to cost-effective, clinically appropriate and affordable health care”.

They also concluded that counties could be required to finance what was enacted by the legislature if it passed the legislature by a 3/5 majority which would remove the unfunded mandate argument.

Many members of both chambers agreed that Oregon can do better when it comes to healthcare services for its citizens, but they disagreed along party lines that SJR 12 is the answer. The voters will now decide and if passed the Legislature will decide what access to cost-effective, clinically appropriate, and affordable health care means, how to pay for it and what other services within he state budget may need to be reduced.


--Terese Humboldt

Post Date: 2021-05-19 07:59:20Last Update: 2021-05-19 18:36:15



The COVID Police
OSHA, OLCC and BOLI will continue to enforce

The Oregon Health Authority released its new Statewide mask requirements today. Here is what you need to know.

Interim Guidance for Fully Vaccinated Individuals

All businesses, employers and faith institutions are required to continue to apply and enforce the mask, face covering and face shield guidance, and physical distancing requirements in state COVID-19 guidance to all individuals unless a business, employer or faith institution: Business that chose not to have a policy for checking proof of vaccine may remain open with face coverings required for all customers.

In a press conference regarding the release of the new options, Dr. Dean Sidelinger, the Director of the Oregon Health Authority (OHA), was asked about the burden this places on businesses to be the ones to ask for proof and then “validate” the proof. He replied “That is why businesses have a choice to wear the mask or ask for customers to show their vaccine card. If it is too hard or they don’t want to review records they can continue to require masks.”

Dr. Siedlinger was also asked about enforcement and who or what state agencies would be responsible for enforcing the business implementation of vaccine proof for those businesses that chose to drop the masks. He responded that “enforcement will continue to be done like it has been done throughout the pandemic by using existing Executive Order authority which includes the use of the Occupational Safety and Health Agency (OSHA), Oregon Liquor Control Commission (OLCC) and local public health departments. Also, individuals can file complaints and OSHA will follow up on the complaint.

The current enforcement language Dr. Sidelinger was referring to is contained in Executive Order 20-66, section 10.

10. Enforcement.
a. This Executive Order, the Risk Level Metrics, and any guidance issued by OHA or another state agency designated by the Governor to implement this Executive Order, are public health laws as defined in ORS 431A.005, and may be enforced as permitted under ORS 43lA.010, including but not limited to enforcement via civil penalties as provided in that statute, which has a statutory maximum fine of $500 per day per violation.

A D V E R T I S E M E N T

A D V E R T I S E M E N T

b. In addition to any other penalty that may be imposed under applicable laws, any person, business, or entity found to be in violation of this Executive Order, the Risk Level Metrics, or any guidance issued by OHA or other state agencies to implement this Executive Order, is subject to the penalties described in ORS 401.990, in particular, that any person knowingly violating this Executive Order shall, upon conviction thereof, be guilty of a Class C misdemeanor, which is punishable by up to 30 days in jail or a fine of $1,250 or both.

c. I direct other state agencies with regulatory enforcement authority, including but not limited to Oregon Occupational Safety and Health (Oregon OSHA) and the Oregon Liquor Control Commission (OLCC), to continue their efforts to protect the lives and health of Oregonians by enforcing, under existing civil and administrative enforcement authorities, the directives in this Executive Order, the Risk Level Metrics, and any guidance issued by OHA or other state agencies to implement this Executive Order.

d. I direct the Superintendent of the Oregon State Police to coordinate with law enforcement agencies throughout the state to enforce the directives of this Executive Order, the Risk Level Metrics, or any guidance issued by OHA or other state agencies to implement this Executive Order, as appropriate. It is my expectation that law enforcement agencies will primarily focus on referral to civil enforcement authorities and will reserve criminal citations for willful and flagrant violations of this order.

So, the question is, how will business know if a vaccine card is authentic? Rachel Monahan with Willamette Week also asked Dr. Sidelinger during the press conference about the authenticity of vaccine cards and the fact that they can be easily faked. Dr. Sidelinger responded saying “We are not expecting businesses to check vax cards for authenticity”. He went on to add that vaccine proof could be “the actual paper record issued during the vaccination, a copy of the record or photograph of the record on your smart phone”. He also assured reporters that “the proof will NOT be recorded by the business they just need to see it”.

The Biden administration has also declared it would not create a federal vaccination database, citing privacy concerns, paving the way for the cards to become the country’s default national way to verify if someone has been vaccinated according to an NBC News Report on forged vaccine certificates. In addition, in an April 6th press conference, White House Press Secretary, Jen Psaki said "The government is not now, nor will be, supporting a system that requires Americans to carry a credential. Our interest is very simple from the federal government, which is Americans' privacy and rights should be protected, and so that these systems are not used against people unfairly." So, do the new OHA rules go against the federal government and the Biden administration?

In a press release from the Oregon Senate Republicans, Senate Republican Leader Fred Girod (R-Lyons) said,

“Vaccine passports are completely contrary to Oregonians' sense of privacy,” in a democracy, having to present proper paperwork to engage in everyday activities is a complete violation of public trust and an invasion of privacy. This kind of dictatorial control over the everyday lives of Oregonians must stop. The Governor should immediately rescind this misguided edict and trust Oregonians.”

The press release went on to say that, to date, Oregon is one of the first, if not the first, to mandate that its residents present credentials to engage in everyday activities without a mask. Struggling small businesses will now need to hire extra staff to question Oregonians’ medical history at these checkpoints or reject scientific recommendations by still mandating masks for vaccinated Oregonians.


--Terese Humboldt

Post Date: 2021-05-19 07:25:44Last Update: 2021-05-19 07:59:20



Girod Blasts Governor’s Decision to Implement Vaccine Passports
“Vaccine passports are contrary to Oregonians' sense of privacy,”

Instead of trusting Oregonians to protect themselves and others, the Governor is now asking places of businesses to play vaccine police.

Following last week's updated mask guidance from the CDC that all vaccinated individuals need not wear a mask in most settings, today Governor Brown’s Oregon Health Authority rolled out a vaccine passport scheme for Oregonians.

“Vaccine passports are completely contrary to Oregonians' sense of privacy,” Senate Republican Leader Fred Girod (R-Lyons) said. “In a democracy, having to present proper paperwork to engage in everyday activities is a complete violation of public trust and an invasion of privacy. This kind of dictatorial control over the everyday lives of Oregonians must stop. The Governor should immediately rescind this misguided edict and trust Oregonians.”

The Biden Administration is pursuing a strategy that puts faith in the American people by ditching plans for a federal vaccine passport. White House Press Secretary, Jen Psaki said in an April 6 press conference, "The government is not now, nor will be, supporting a system that requires Americans to carry a credential. Our interest is very simple from the federal government, which is Americans' privacy and rights should be protected, and so that these systems are not used against people unfairly."

To date, Oregon is one of the first, if not the first, to mandate that its residents present credentials to engage in everyday activities without a mask. Struggling small businesses will now need to hire extra staff to question Oregonians’ medical history at these checkpoints, or reject scientific recommendations by still mandating masks for vaccinated Oregonians.

“At every turn, Governor Brown has mistrusted Oregonians to protect themselves and each other. She has resorted to dictatorial edict after dictatorial edict. It needs to stop now. The pandemic is receding. If she can’t give Oregonians their freedom back now, when will she? The Legislature needs to step up now and rein in the Governor’s power to stop her erosion of democratic norms.”


--Staff Reports

Post Date: 2021-05-18 17:38:51



New Mask Guidelines are Out
Spoiler alert: You need a mask or proof of vaccinations

Driven by the CDC announcement that its guidance would be that masks need not be worn, Oregon Governor Kate Brown has struggled to produce a response with the major point being whether businesses will be required to ask customers to prove or demonstrate that they have been vaccinated, new mask guidelines have been produced by OSHA today. These guidelines are strangely silent on any requirement that businesses check vaccination status.

If your hopes were raised, they should now be dashed as a press conference with the Oregon Health Authority has made it clear that businesses are required to check vaccination status.

If a business, employer or faith institution chooses to no longer require masks and physical distancing, the business, employer or faith institution must require visitors to show proof of vaccination and review the proof of vaccination. In that case, a business would need to have a policy for checking the vaccination status of customers and employees if they are not wearing masks. Fully vaccinated individuals would need to provide proof they’d been vaccinated if they want to remove face coverings and not observe physical distancing guidelines.

These policies are echoed in a one-page explanatory document issued by the Oregon Health Authority.

The guidance seems to indicate that businesses are to develop their own policy for checking "proof" of vaccination and doesn't describe that process. The guidance doesn't take up such issues as people who cannot be vaccinated and people who have tested positive for COVID-19 in the past and may have natural immunity.

Several businesses have opened to maskless shopping. We'll see if Governor Brown has enough clout to turn that around.


--Staff Reports

Post Date: 2021-05-18 12:27:38Last Update: 2021-05-18 16:04:31



The Pink Tax
What problem are you trying to solve?

It's no secret that prescription drug prices are spiraling out of control. The cause of the high cost isn't so well understood by some. Take SB 711, introduced by Senator Deb Patterson (D-Salem) which requires the Department of Consumer and Business Services to study cost differences in hormone replacement drugs used by men and pharmaceuticals] hormone replacement drugs used by women and report findings to Legislative Assembly. Patterson describes what she calls a "Pink Tax" in her testimony on the bill:

"In retail sales, it is a common practice to charge more for items targeted at women than items targeted at men. Such gender-specific pricing is commonly referred to as the “Pink Tax.” We see It in items such as personal care products such as shampoo or razors and in services such as dry cleaning -- a woman’s cotton blouse costs more to dry clean than a man’s cotton shirt."

Patterson ignores the fact that in a free-market economy, anyone can set any price they want, and if there really were an arbitrary reason for charging more for personal care products or dry cleaning, some crafty entrepreneur would by now have cut the price on these items and cornered the market. Price injustice almost only occurs under monopolies, during natural disasters and under the reign of government price fixing. Patterson concludes her testimony:

Finally, I would like to remind the Health Committee that a gender pay gap exists, as well, with white women making on average 79 cents for every dollar a white man makes. For women of color, the disparity is greater, dropping to 62 cents for black women and 54 cents for Hispanic women. We must work to close these gaps, and to address inequities where they exist across our economy. Exploring whether there is gender inequity in pharmaceutical costs, which have risen by 33% in the last seven years, is another piece of that puzzle.

Senator Patterson seems at once very progressive, while at the same time a step behind the current left-leaning thought on gender, which is characterized at least by an utter inability to define a man or a woman.

Senator Kim Thatcher (R-Keizer), also provided testimony on the bill from the perspective of someone who -- at least at one time -- knew man from woman.

As written, the bill is problematic in that we should be looking at pharmaceutical costs in aggregate, and not based on preconceived notions of what “female” drugs or “male” drugs are. In classifying drugs this way, without looking at the real reasons behind the costs of the drugs, we fail to consider that drugs aren’t used specific to gender, specific to men or specific to women. Drugs are used to treat medical ailments, or to promote positive health outcomes for those to whom they’ve been prescribed.

Her testimony continued

If we start categorizing these types of hormone therapies as men’s and women’s drugs, we are missing the point that the goal should be to treat patients where they’re at with their health, with their medical conditions, and not try to segment their conditions perceived on “this” being for a man or “that” being for a woman.

Senator Thatcher concluded her testimony, by scolding the legislature for it's treatment of the gender issue in general.

This bill is well-intended but because of bills this body has chosen to pass, the terms “men” and “women,” are no longer relevant in Oregon law. It’s a little confusing this body would choose to use these terms now, regardless of past policy precedent.

It gets hard to create law and policy on the subject of gender when there no longer is gender.


--Staff Reports

Post Date: 2021-05-18 12:05:58Last Update: 2021-05-17 18:21:02



Legislature Enables Medical Passports
Individually identifiable information would be used

Oregon's Governor Kate Brown has announced that she would immediately have the state follow the CDC guidance on masks, all the while setting standards so high it will be at least several weeks before Oregonians can breathe easy again.

According to the latest CDC guidance, all people will still be required to wear masks only on public transportation, inside airports and while in health care settings.

Not letting a CDC guideline go to waste, Governor Brown has her team, Representative Andrea Salinas (D-Lake Oswego), Representative Ron Noble (R-McMinnville), Senator Deb Patterson (D-Salem), Representative Lisa Reynolds (D-Portland), Representative Maxine Dexter (D-Portland), Representative Paul Evans (D-Monmouth), Representative Dacia Grayber (D-Tigard), Representative Rachel Prusak (D-Tualatin), and Representative Sheri Schouten (D-Beaverton) making sure HB 3057 passed both houses on May 13.

HB 3057 is Oregon’s attempt to make vaccine passports a reality. The bill violates federal law and HIPPA patient privacy. The intent is to allow nurses and bureaucrats not involved in patient care to access a citizens’ medical records on a computer system without either the patient or patient’s providers knowledge.

Senator Boquist (I-Dallas) has released a vote explanation saying:

“HB 3057 is an Oregon Health Authority end run on HIPAA confidential patient health information very likely in violation of federal law. Likely a statute designed to shield OHA from its illegal activities during the symptomatic Covid-19 political pandemic in which OHA locked seniors in homes to intentionally perish. Classic crimes against humanity. Oddly, the bill attempts to re-define Covid-19 directly to only cases of SARSCoV-2 instead of their own OHA CDC definition of symptomatic Covid-19 which is 16 times broader per the CDC’s own data. If the bill’s definition were strictly applied cases would plummet, however, the definition cannot be correct. Nor does OHA display any competency what-so-ever to be given any additional authority. The Carrier was quite clear the intent was to allow nurses and bureaucrats not involved in patient care to access a citizen’s medical records on a computer system without either the patient or patient’s providers knowledge. The Carrier stated the intent was to protect nurses from exposure that were not patient providers. The Carrier could not provide a reason for the need of this bill at this time when questioned…”

Boquist goes on to point out some discrepancies in the bill regarding the security of patient information that ultimately allows OHA to release patient information for any reason it deems necessary and to non-providers.

The legislative analysis indicates that according to the United States Department of Health and Human Services Office of Civil Rights, the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) Privacy Rule allows law enforcement, paramedics, and public health authorities to disclose protected health information (PHI) of an individual infected with, or exposed to, COVID-19. For public health purposes, federal law allows covered entities such as hospitals to disclose PHI with federal, state, and local health departments, if reporting is for public health activities and disclosure is required by federal, state, or local law.

Thus, we have HB 3057 authorizing disclosure, but the bill doesn’t just allow the Oregon Health Authority to receive information as HIPAA would suggest. It wants to share your medical information with the world. Whether it be via an app verifying vaccinations to fly or to do business in person, it discloses protected health information beyond the medical field and beyond public health purposes creating its own pandemic.


--Donna Bleiler

Post Date: 2021-05-18 11:24:43Last Update: 2021-05-18 11:44:07



Don’t Get Rid of that Mask Just Yet
Gov. Brown balks at a maskless society

As the surprise CDC guidance on masks is embraced and celebrated by some, in Oregon, the mighty hand of government may not be moving on this issue. Governor Kate Brown has issued a statement on the CDC action in which she announces the rosy news.

Starting today, Oregon will be following this guidance, which only applies to fully-vaccinated individuals. That means Oregonians who are fully-vaccinated no longer need to wear masks or social distance in most public spaces.

Further in her comments, the Governor makes it clear that masklessness is dependent on vaccine compliance and providing proof of being vaccinated.

In the coming days, the Oregon Health Authority will be providing updated guidance for businesses, employers, and others to allow the option of lifting mask and physical distancing requirements after verifying vaccination status. Some businesses may prefer to simply continue operating under the current guidance for now, rather than worrying about verifying vaccination status, and that’s fine.

The Governor makes it clear that she regards masks as a trade for vaccines. That might work for most people. It may not work for those who -- for a medical reason -- cannot be vaccinated. It fails to take into account those who have already had the disease -- can we call them "COVID survivors?" She lays out the options.

Oregonians now have a choice of how to protect themselves and others from COVID-19: either get vaccinated, or continue wearing a mask and following physical distancing requirements. The new CDC guidance makes clear that vaccines are the best tool to protect yourself, and everyone around you. Vaccines are also the fastest way to get back to doing the things we all love, and to returning to a sense of normalcy.

At the very least, Oregonians are owed a more specific description of the options and the consequences. At this stage, Oregonians are probably owed some freedom.


--Staff Reports

Post Date: 2021-05-18 08:38:56Last Update: 2021-05-17 18:29:39



Can the Grand Old Party GOP Survive in Oregon?
Bill would make it illegal to simultaneously serve as a state officer

Oregon politics has been dominated by the Democrat party since 2007 when the party took over controlling majority in the House, the Senate and the Governor’s office, and the Republican party has struggled to regain a balance of power ever since. Difference of opinions within the party at the national and local level have dominated conversation in recent years and in some cases possibly cost the party elections. Now, Senator Lynn Findley (R-Vale), and Senator Bill Hansell (R–Athena) and Senator Rob Wagner (D– Lake Oswego) have introduced SB 865 at the request of the Malheur, Baker and Morrow County Republican Executive Committees which would change who may serve as state elected officer of a party Central Committee. The bill appears to be targeted at the Republican party as the Chair and Treasurer are both current sitting Republican Senators; Senator Dallas Heard, Chair (R–Roseburg) and Senator Dennis Linthicum, Treasurer (R–Klamath Falls). The Democrat Party State leadership has no sitting elected state officials in their executive Committee.

The changes would make it illegal to simultaneously serve as a state officer (Governor, Secretary of State, State Treasurer, Attorney General, Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor and Industries, state Senator or Representative, Judge of the Supreme Court or Judge of the Court of Appeals) and hold an elected officer position of the State Central committee of a major political party.

SB 865 proposes to add to existing law in ORS 248.072. The section of law that covers the Authority of the State Central Committee for major political parties.

“The state central committee is the highest party authority in the state and may adopt rules or resolutions for any matter of party government which is not controlled by the laws of this state”.

However, the bill does not address other statues in the same section of law that cover fair representation within the State Central Committee.

ORS 248.005 Partied to insure widest and fairest representation of members.
Each political party by rule shall insure the widest and fairest representation of party members in the party organization and activities. Rules shall be adopted by procedures that assure the fair and open participation of all interested party members.

ORS 248.007 Organization of major political party.
(1) Subject to ORS 248.005 (Parties to insure widest and fairest representation of members), a major political party may organize and select delegates to national party conventions in any manner.

In addition, there is also the possibility that the change in statute would be in conflict with federal law under free speech and associational rights of political parties and their members guaranteed by the First and Fourteenth Amendments.

The bill is scheduled for a hearing in the Senate Committee on Rules, chaired by one of the main sponsors, Sen. Wagner on May 18th. As of press time there were over a hundred pieces of submitted testimony, the majority of which is against the bill. However, this session many bills have been overwhelmingly opposed by the voters and the super majority has pushed the legislation through anyway. The Oregon Republican party was established in February 1857 as the Free State Republican Party of Oregon and held its first state convention on April 1, 1859. However, with an emergency clause in SB 865, and a fine of up to $250 per day for violation, the Oregon Republican Party could be using their next state convention to replace half of their State Executive Committee.


--Terese Humboldt

Post Date: 2021-05-18 07:44:55Last Update: 2021-05-17 16:05:58



Mike Frith, 1947-2021
Salem radio pioneer, may he rest in peace

In the early 1990’s Mike Frith, a long time sales representative for large corporations like Aladdin, moved to Salem and bought AM 1430 KYKN which had been a classic country station for decades. He flipped it to talk radio fairly quickly and became one of the “heritage” Rush Limbaugh stations. He then added many other legendary Conservative radio shows like Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Glenn Beck and more. He was always involved in the Salem Keizer community and served many, many people, both customers and listeners well. He cared about sharing American values and America First thinking long before it was in vogue.

In 2008, I was an out of work deejay after the station I was working for went out of business. I went to Mike looking for work even though I knew my chances were slim since most of his programming was via satellite. He gave me a job reading news, sports and weather in short 3 minute breaks during Laura Ingraham’s morning show. Eventually, in 2009, he allowed me to try an one hour talk show which led to a three hour show later that year, The Bill Post Radio Show. His faith in me was humbling and I will forever be grateful for that.

Late Friday afternoon, he passed away surrounded by family. I will miss him but know that he is with his beloved wife Pat who passed a few years ago. I don’t know what the future holds for KYKN but know that Mike’s legacy will live on! “Ten Hut” to Sgt. Mike!


--State Representative Bill Post

Post Date: 2021-05-17 18:02:38Last Update: 2021-05-17 18:13:58



Read More Articles